Forum Moderators: phranque
This thought comes to mind with the recent thread on Google's actions [webmasterworld.com] in an obvious copyright infringement. Coincidentally, I have recently procured permissions from a music publisher for application of one of their artist's works.
The differences between the case above and the small-time rampant violations of which I speak are titantic. But IMO, a small time thief is still a thief.
My wife's web site is a business site and part of that business involves a particular genre of dancing. One of the clips for a non-profit demonstration was elected to be displayed on the website. Immediately, and prior to publishing, I opened a dialogue with the music publisher to procure permissions to publicly display the video with the background music intact.
Aquiring permissions to use the artist's material was a LOT easier than I imagined it would be. We simply opened a dialogue by email, agreed on preliminary usage, and prepared a cut for them to view.
After viewing the video from a password-protected location, the publisher graciously agreed to open with a 6 month license to display the video ONLY on the website with the music intact for a modest $100 administration fee to cover their paperwork costs. They pre-approved that we start displaying the video prior to seeing paper, so we have. The whole process took about 5 days.
All in all, this was every bit worth the trouble. I know We Did The Right Thing, there is no argument on that point. I see millions of videos out there overdubbed with everything with someone's favorite death metal to Manilow like it's okay to do this.
It's NOT okay. It's illegal.
I know it would be an administration and legal nightmare to pursue. Like I said, everyone gets on a soapbox and carries the copyright flag at the mention of "borrowing" pictures or content, and does what they can to protect THEIR original works - but what does anyone do to protect the copyrights of others?
Do you just avoid the issue entirely and use only royalty free content?
I tend not to use music content but all of my images I either create or acquire legally.
It's illegal.
Actually, I think that it may fall under fair use, which is legal. Fair use is an iffy sort of thing, but those videos where people are lip synching or dancing could qualify as commentary on the music. IANAL, so I could be wrong but I could see it argued that way.
In cases where people upload the video straight without changing it, share music that is unaltered or rip off an image just to use on their site (while not commenting directly on the image), that is blatent copyright violation.
Fair use is a slippery topic, and one that has been around long before the internet was a twinkling.
A perfect example is a kid in anytown USA cuts a video beating up his RC on the street, then overdubs his favorite Metallica song, then publishes it on the web.
Said kiddo grows up, his site becomes an important point of interest for hobbyists, maybe he begins making money on an adSense campaign, all because he is drawing traffic to his site from his "cool videos," all of which contain unauthorized redistributions of artists' music.
This, in my understanding, is a copyright infringement. You are copying, publishing, and redistributing, and to boot, using those stolen resources to cut a profit. "Fair use" doesn't play into it.
Maybe it's just me. I thought this was illegal. :-)
I think that it may fall under fair use, which is legal.
rocknbil brings up a good point though.
There still needs to be a lot of education in the YouTube / MySpace crowd about copyright law. Not only for the sake of the owner of any copyrighted material they may be using but also for their own sake.
For example, I recently met the organizers of a short film festival here in Europe. They gave me a DVD of all the short films that were going to be involved in the screening. I was astounded at how many hit songs were being used in the soundtracks. U2, Elton John, almost all of the audio in the festival was illegal.
I suggested to the festival organizer that they take a hard look at what they were doing for their own sake. I asked her "What if there is a real gem in there, something that deserves international distribution? You won't ever be able to do anything with these short films except show them at this one festival simply because of the music you chose to use."
I was surprised to learn that by the next week some of the filmmakers were contacting their composer friends and changing their soundtracks.
Our company also donated a lot of royalty free material to the festival and will do so in the future.
I think in general people want to be legal. They just need to be shown how easy it is to do these days (as rocknbil has pointed out). And how rewarding it can be when you are the rightful legal owner of your creations.
